Credentials issues

[D_K]

I am the chair of the credentials committee at an upcoming state convention.  Some local units are holding special meetings to fill vacancies in their delegation (we don't have alternates).  Special meetings are authorized.  I am receiving information that some local units are not giving proper notice of these meetings.  One unit gave notice less than the five days required by the bylaws and another published the notice in the local paper instead of mailing it out.  The bylaws require that the local unit certify the results of the election to the state organization, which is then used to issue credentials.  If no one at the local level objects to the lack of timely notice, does a person have grounds at the convention to challenge the delegates elected at the meeting (which is a real possibility)?

 

I understand that business conducted at a meeting without proper notice is null and void, but does the credentials committee have authority to declare the elections void?  Or is the proper recourse to tell a complaining party that he or she has to raise a point of order at the next meeting of the local unit, which means the elections will stand for the convention?  The convention starts next week, so there won't be time for any other local meetings before then.  The convention as a whole will have the ultimate say on who it seats, so I'm just trying to get a handle on the procedure at the committee level.  Thank you.

[jstackpo]

Seems to me that the local unit has the responsibility to enforce its own bylaws. 

 

You, and your credentials committee, would not seem to be in a position to do anything about the unit's misbehavior, as long as the unit certifies that their delegate(s) were properly selected.  Your report to the convention would have to include all those certified delegate(s).

 

Notice my use of "seems".  Perhaps others are less forgiving than I.  And your state bylaws may give you authority to question a unit's certification.  But that is for you to research.

 

RONR (p. 616) does allow the convention body to amend your report - they could strike out delegate's names I suppose, but RONR appears to allow these amendments only to replace delegates with different ones.  And debate on whether delegate Charlie is a legitimate one or not could get you into a lot of "he says, she says" arguments.

 

Good luck!

[D_K]

Thank you.  That's the position I was leaning towards adopting, but wasn't sure of.  However, I could still be persuaded otherwise if others have compelling arguments.

 

A few points of clarification:

1. Local units don't have bylaws.  The state bylaws govern the operation of both the state organization and the local units.

2. The only mention in the bylaws of the credentials committee is that it is to be appointed by the state president prior to the convention.

 

And I have also now heard from reputable sources that the certification sent in by another local unit likely was just filled out by the local chairman without any meeting at all.  Would this fall under the same category as the issues I mentioned above, or is this of a different kind?

[jstackpo]

Well... it is, as you say, (just) hearsay.

 

If your "reputable sources" are themselves certified delegates - from a different unit - they, I suppose, could raise objections at your convention when the credentials report is first presented for adoption.

 

I'd suggest you give a close reading to pp. 610-617 in RONR.  Forewarned, and all that.